More than a decade ago, I was asked if we could sing happy birthday in church for one of our young children. It was her birthday that day and she came from a really troubled family. She needed the attention and we were like family. I was happy to encourage the church to celebrate with her.
The next year, on the way into church, she asked if we were going to sing happy birthday for her. I said “why not?” and we did. But I felt kind of funny about it. This isn’t something we usually do.
Somebody asked afterward why we don’t sing happy birthday for other people. My response was always, “maybe we should.” But the reality was that they didn’t really want us singing happy birthday every week. Maybe every month would work. But this also isn’t really about singing, but how we approach honoring one another. How and who and when.
The NFL chose to honor Charlie Kirk.
The first game of the week was going to start within 24 hours of news breaking of the polarizing figure’s death. As is the case with public tragedies, the NFL chose to acknowledge it on Thursday night. They then allowed other teams to choose to do so throughout the weekend.
Seeing so many NFL teams give Charlie Kirk a moment of silence is just weird. Not in the idea that a person getting respect is a problem, but because of all of the people who don’t get any.
Unlike the child, years ago, who actually needed love and attention from her church, this chosen display represents a far more deeply troubling development. Children were shot at nearly the same time in a school who didn’t receive that public honor. Earlier in the year, a public servant was murdered in her home. She didn’t receive that honor, either.
Across the NFL, Kirk alone received that honor, as the NFL noted, because he was a public figure. But, again, this isn’t applied to other public figures. Including people far more public, far more famous, and let’s be clear, far more universally loved.
According to USA Today, it seems that the Miami Dolphins were the only ones that tried to make a decent sense of it:
“The Miami Dolphins had a moment of silence for Kirk, the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks “and any other victims of violence” along with a “prayer for unity in our country.””
The question of the hour, however, is this:
Why did the NFL get political?
People need to be extremely careful about the application of honor when it is not generously applied, when it conveniently represents ideological convictions that appear to be politically one-sided, and worse, represent ideological positions that are hostile to the majority of Americans.
It does not represent a partisan statement to say that Charlie Kirk did not represent either the center of political discourse, nor did he function as a bridge toward a more functional political future. He wasn’t just a fierce partisan, but one who trafficked in racist, eugenicist, and white supremacist ideologies. It isn’t just that he is a political figure. He is a polarizing figure with fringe views.
He also didn’t serve in government, wasn’t an Emmy-winning broadcaster on a national network, or play a central role in any national accomplishment. He didn’t help us achieve peace in our time.
Kirk was a right-wing political activist. That’s his deal.
Kirk’s primary avocation was to harrass teachers, students, professors, and administrations of universities and public schools. He published a “hitlist” of professors and encouraged followers to attack the subjects on the list. And given his willingness to protect those people who use violence, including those who attacked Paul Pelosi, the husband of the former House Speaker of the US House of Representatives, his followers understood the assignment was not just “free speech”.
His public appearances represented the appearance of civility more than fair debate. This was important for his brand as a fierce advocate for free speech. In practice, Kirk cherry-picked, omitted, and abused his teenage debate opponents. Then he clipped them for podcasts and videos so he could be seen decimating liberals.
What exactly, then, is an appropriate public figure?
Considering how the NFL treated Colin Kaepernick, it is shocking that the NFL would consider an overtly partisan and hostile figure as sufficiently public to overtake his political character. Kaepernick was a player, of course, so he would be treated differently. But the simple idea that he was perceived as controversial was disqualifying. Why is Kirk not disqualified?
But we don’t have to focus only on the politics to find this confusing.
Last week saw a whole host of public figures die including:
- Rick Davies of Supertramp;
- Davey Johnson, an All-Star second basemen and manager;
- Hall of Fame hockey player and former Member of Parliament (Canada) Ken Dryden; and
- world-famous designer Giorgio Armani
So it isn’t the public figure itself that leads to the honor, is it? I would argue that all four of these men were probably more famous and ultimately more public than Kirk.
And if we’re talking about tragedy rather than public figure, then why was the moment of silence not for the children shot that day? Why wasn’t the moment of silence dedicated to the victims of shooting, including Charlie Kirk?
The NFL does have a track record of responding to tragedy this way. They did so just this summer before the Hall of Fame Game.
Honoring Charlie Kirk is different and we know it.
This is why I started with my own experience of trying to honor someone who actually needed to be honored. It was precisely because she wasn’t being honored anywhere else. And I have little doubt that Charlie Kirk, like any other person of faith, was going to be honored in a burial service from his church.
Considering the nature of honoring the dead and recognizing tragedy in major public forums, we seem to have two specific expectations.
- It has to be very significant with universal impact or
- We have to be extremely generous, offering honor to all.
So if we’re going to honor Kirk because he was a victim of violence than let’s bring in the victims of violence. Or, if we want to single him out for particular honor, then we should probably all want him to be honored.
Do we? All want him honored? That’s going to be a big fat no.
Is the NFL paying tribute to all public figures? No. All victims of violence? No.
This is clearly different. And, again, deeply divisive and politcally dubious. Are all political activists going to get tributes now? When a famously supportive philanthropist dies, will we see the majority of NFL teams offer a moment of silence? For George Soros, perhaps?
Yes, there is tragedy here, and that is precisely why the NFL honored Kirk on Thursday. It is not why he was honored throughout the weekend. And it is also why the absence of honor for other victims shreds this argument.
A political trend
This fits within a specific kind of political trend. One that has been going for a very long time. And one that has become as of late, quite one-sided.
The trend of one part of the political spectrum celebrating and normalizing their own figures for the advancement of politics. It is why some would seek to name every airport, highway, and government building after a popular party leader. It scribes their legacy into the public space. When done with scandalized figures or extremists, we erase their true impact.
The people whose lives were broken open by bigotry, like the victims of Kirk’s mission to destroy education — they are erased. From the narrative, from the hagiography that becomes our history.
A man who, just last year, pitched the white supremacist great replacement theory was honored by the NFL with a moment of silence in nearly every game played this week. Not because he was a good person. Or because it is what the NFL does for every tragedy.
For his politics.
Because the people who support his politics want all of us to honor him. Not just for his humanity, but entirely for his politics.
A politics that doesn’t honor our children, educators, racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ persons, the disabled, the poor, those experiencing homelessness, the incarcerated, persons of other faiths — in other words, the people. Our common life together.
The NFL should have given a moment of silence for the children who were shot that same day. And let his church honor him.
Since the NFL is obviously in the business of acknowledging public tragedies, maybe this week they’ll honor the over half-million Palestinians that Israel has killed during their genocide in Gaza.